Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Bullpup design

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by UKTN, Feb 5, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. UKTN

    UKTN Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    74
    Location:
    Eastern Tennessee
    Am I the only one who thinks the "Bullpup" design looks wrong.
    I have never handled one but it looks as though the magazine would get in the way, and having my face over the firing mechanism would make me uneasy! What are your thoughts.
     
  2. fattsgalore

    fattsgalore Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    365
    Bullpup just looks cool and from what is said( i have no personal experience handling them) they have better ergonomics then other rifles. And long barrel on a compact frame isn't to shabby either.
    [​IMG] Come on! That looks awsome! The Tavor C
     
  3. 1 old 0311

    1 old 0311 member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2005
    Messages:
    2,672
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    You are putting a lot of leverage, and mechanics, into that. Bullpups are not a new idea. There is a reason the AK, M16, M14, and FAL's are NOT Bullpups. Ever seen one with a lot of mileage on it? Probably won't.
     
  4. CypherNinja

    CypherNinja Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Location:
    Willoughby, Ohio
  5. Justin

    Justin Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    19,285
    Location:
    THE CHAIR IS AGAINST THE WALL
    The newer crop of bullpup rifles seem to have made a lot of strides in the ergonomics department. Easier to handle, and fully ambidextrious in some cases.

    I've not shot enough of them to fully form an opinion, but my general impressions are that they tend to be spendy, and the triggers are usually sub-par.

    However, Kel-Tec claims to have a new bullpup with a 2 lb. trigger, so I assume that the reputation for bad triggers in bullpup rifles is something that just needs to be refined.
     
  6. DoubleTapDrew

    DoubleTapDrew Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Messages:
    5,356
    Location:
    Oregon
    I think they are cool looking and it seems that a lot of the upcoming battle rifles are using that design. As long as the ejection port is away from the face (P90 ejects down, FS2000 and KelTec eject near the front) they should work for both left and right handed shooters (or switching shoulders if you are clearing a structure). Also it allows the gun to be more compact yet still retain a full length barrel.
    On the downside, I've heard they usually have poor trigger pull due to the extended linkage necessary (which would also make me concerned about reliability) and the weight seems to be shifted toward the rear (which could cause balance problems?)
    I just wish the dang things didn't cost as much as a pair of AR15s.
     
  7. alucard0822

    alucard0822 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,229
    Location:
    Westminster, MD
    bullpup rifles are a love it or hate it kind of thing. On the good side they allow a full length barell to fit in something about the same size as a rifle with a folding stock, but there is no need to extend a stock to shoulder it. there is less exposed hot barell and because the weight is more to the rear the muzzle can be swung around quicker. The downside, the sights normally are mounted high and on a short radius, more of the body is exposed in firing, the trigger pull generally is long heavy and spongy. Magazine changes are more cumbersome, and shooting left handed ejects bounces brass off your chin. some of the problems have been solved by one manufacturer or another, but all in all tradeoffs can be worthwhile. This is my 10/22 with muzzlelite kit. more accurate than a pistol, lighter and more compact than with the wood stock. with these 30rd mags its about all the firepower you need for small stuff without lugging around a larger rifle [​IMG]
     

    Attached Files:

  8. CypherNinja

    CypherNinja Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Location:
    Willoughby, Ohio
    Traditionally, bullpups place the hammer and sear in the normal arrangement back by the bolt. They then use a trigger transfer bar to connect the trigger (which is far forward) to the sear. That long transfer bar is what creates the poor triggers.

    Kel-Tec's new rifle uses a slightly different system which I am simultaneously happy and pissed about. Happy because the idea popped into my head nearly ten years ago and somebody is finally making one, and pissed because I didn't get off my ass and patent it. :mad: Anyway, the Kel-Tec uses a system that places the hammer in the normal spot, but uses a "hammer transfer bar" (with the hammer spring on it) to connect the hammer to the sear which is placed forward with the trigger. This way, the trigger and sear can interact in the same way as any other rifle, and any extra wobbles or friction from the transfer bar manifest themselves in the hammer movement.

    You can see the layout in the PDF I linked.
     
  9. SniperStraz

    SniperStraz Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    851
    Well. They're smaller than traditional type combat rifles and yet retain the same length barrels. They're better balanced due to the mag being in the back and can therefore be fired more easily with one hand for say... shooting around corners. Also the ejection port is next to the shooters face as opposed to in front. This means less visible muzzle blast so as not to mess with a soldier's night vision. (Try following me on this one, I know it doesn't sound like it makes sense right away.) I have also heard that since the ejection port is closer to the side of the shooters face, when running forward in battle the shooter doesn't get a face full of gas from the spent round which supposedly has been known to give soldiers headaches if the have been in long firefights. Instead the gas is just left behind them as they run forward.
    (sorry for the redundency)
     
  10. Wes Janson

    Wes Janson Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,962
    The only thing that annoys me about the Kel-Tec system is that the ~$1500 model won't have the adjustable trigger pack. I tried it, and it really does go down to about 2 pounds. I watched someone else take the detached, cocked, trigger pack and repeatedly bang it sharply into the table without dropping the hammer. Wasn't too good for the housing, but it proved that it could indeed be used as a hammer if necessary :D

    As a leftie, I'm glad to finally see a good bullpup chambering a decent cartridge. The AUG is/was too pricey, the Bushmaster is unshootable (can we say "beard-induced stoppages"?), the PS90 is too small/ammo too pricey, and the FN2000 is far too bulky. Dunno on the Tavor or any of the other foreign models.
     
  11. rockstar.esq

    rockstar.esq Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,475
    "The downside, the sights normally are mounted high and on a short radius, more of the body is exposed in firing..."

    I guess if you're talking about shooting from the prone higher sights might make a big difference. That being said, the Kel-Tec has the pistol grip mounted nearly 1" higher in relation to the chamber than an AR so the higher sight radius should about balance out the weapons "prone height". Personally I think the biggest failing of Bullpup designers is that they insist on putting iron sights similar to the AR rear which has folks mounting optics like the Muzzle light. It's just as awkward as AR's with scopes mounted the same way. Personally I think the scout type scope would be vastly superior especially if mounted on a bullpup. Sadly nobody seems to think of things like this when they design the gun.

    Although I can see how military opinion weighs in on decisions, I prefer to consider Bullpups as the modern hunting carbine. I for one think something that short and handy with full ballistic advantage will make a wonderful hunting gun.
     
  12. Correia

    Correia Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2002
    Messages:
    10,648
    Location:
    SLC
    And that lone quote sums up one of my biggest pet peeves about the internet in general, and gun forums in particular. :)
     
  13. Zak Smith

    Zak Smith Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    9,037
    Location:
    Fort Collins, CO, USA.
    There are a number of basic operations that the design and ergonomics of the rifle have to support.

    * administrative, emergency, tactical, and speed reloads
    * administrative loading and cycling action after seating new magazine
    * malfunction/jam clearing: cycling action, locking action open, "hard-extract" actions (ie, stomp on charging handle), chamber/action visibility
    * safety actuation

    For example, the FS2000 (as reviewed recently in SWAT or something) fixes the ejection problem, but has limited visibility to the ejection port and no physical access to malf clearing.

    Conventional non-bullpup designs tend to put the controls near to where the shooter's hands are anyway.
     
  14. Kalashnikov

    Kalashnikov Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    399
    Combat wise, bullpups seem to be becoming the majority. Only Germany, Russia, And America use old fashioned rifles, all other modern antiosn ahve adopted a bullpup of some sorts. And even then, Russia is experimenting with them, with some success I've heard.
     
  15. SniperStraz

    SniperStraz Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    851
    The Israelis in general still use the M-16/M-4 although there are some units using the Tavor which I have heard is amazing.
     
  16. Kalashnikov

    Kalashnikov Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    399
    From what I've heard they're doing a complete turnover to the Tavor.
     
  17. SniperStraz

    SniperStraz Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Messages:
    851
    Eventually, yes. But that takes alot of time and money. I'd give it another 6-7 years atleast.
     
  18. Shipwreck

    Shipwreck Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,625
    Location:
    Texas
    I'll tell ya what mine is very comfortable...

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  19. jerkface11

    jerkface11 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    5,498
    Location:
    Arkansas
    The ONLY way to get at the chamber in the keltec is via the mag well. Which would prove annoying on a range trip and deadly if it were a battle rifle. Other than that i'd love to have one. Or an FAMAS or AUG or even an SA80 heck i'd take the tavor.
     
  20. JWarren

    JWarren Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,632
    Location:
    MS and LA
    I personally like the *IDEA* of a bullpup rife. But a great number of factors have dissuaded me.

    For one, most have a crappy trigger due having a trigger cable. I think the new Kel-Tec is doing something different by having a hammer extension-type mechanism rather than trigger.

    However, that doesn't change the fact that you have a right-handed only rifle. I know that some-- such as the Styr AUG-- is supposed to be able to be converted to left-handed. But I don't know if that can be done quickly and on the fly. Even if it is, that is one more step you have to do if you find yourself in a situation where you need to left-hand shoulder.

    Believe it or not, I have found myself in that position several times. I deer hunt with my rifles. Even though I am left handed, I have always been right-handed in shooting-- mainly because that was the only rifles I had to learn on. Fortunately, shooting left-handed is just as easy and natural feeling as right-handed to me. That said, I was thinking through all the deer I've killed. I've actually killed more deer left-handed than I have right handed! It seems the deer don't often care to coorperate with me on my stand placement.

    Whether it is deer hunting or a valid SHTF, or defense situation, you can't always predict or control your position and the position of your target. You may very well find yourself in a position to improvise quickly. I don't see your typical bullpup able to do that.

    Of course that new Kel-Tec has a forward eject system that does address that issue. We'll see how that works. It may very well be a major improvement that makes bullpups more viable.


    John
     
  21. Dmack_901

    Dmack_901 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    361
    Location:
    FL
    At least with Kel-Tec's, forward ejection allows for full ambidextrity(spll?).
     
  22. rockstar.esq

    rockstar.esq Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,475
    It truly never ceases to amaze me how whenever I post that the bullpup design would be great for hunting / sporting purposes, the only repeated monolithic slab of controversy is the "blacktical rifle nonsensory" of battle worthiness. Yet if you post about how a Savage bolt action groups nobody yammers on about how it isn't "battle proven". The same goes for Marlin lever actions, or Thompson Center single shots. On just about ANY other rifle type people can see the gun as serving different purposes without doggedly whining about things that wouldn't affect them either way. Mall ninja's, L.E.'s and in service military folks aside, the VAST majority have no "tactical" rifle needs that couldn't be readily answered by just about any repeating rifle made.
     
  23. JWarren

    JWarren Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,632
    Location:
    MS and LA
    I hear ya Rockstar, but I wasn't only talking about tactical limitations of the left-handed difficulty. I was talking about hunting as well. As I mentioned in my post, I've had MANY occasions where I had to switch shoulders to get the shot.

    I like bullpups in theory, but those won't make that shoulder switch easily. (For the right buck, I'd try it and just eat the brass and gas LOL)

    This year I am hunting with a semi-automatic so I very well may experience some difficulty with this even now. Add to that the fact that my scope is mounted off the center line of the rifle, and it pretty much means I better not have to switch shoulders. So its not just bullpups that have some issues in switching from shoulder to shoulder.

    That's one reason I need to put another bolt-action in my arsenal. You may not be able to chamber another round easily, but at least you can fire the first shot fine-- and that's all I need. :D


    All the best!

    John
     
  24. Wes Janson

    Wes Janson Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    1,962
    I'm a leftie, and I really couldn't find anything on the Kel-Tec that would be an issue. Safety is symmetrical ambidextrous, the bolt release (which was just a temporary prototype at the show) is ambidextrous, the mag release is a central lever on the bottom, brass ejection is forward, and the only asymmetrical control, the cocking handle, can be popped off and put onto the other side in about twenty seconds.

    I suspect that we'll be seeing more bullpups in the next few years that are naturally ambidextrous and don't require much effort, if any, to convert back and forth.
     
  25. JWarren

    JWarren Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,632
    Location:
    MS and LA
    Wes,

    I understand what you are saying, but that quote was regarding bullpups in general. There's been plenty of bullpups mades out there. Some are strictly right hand rifles, some can be converted with a couple processes, and then there's ONE that is the Kel-Tec 308.

    I agree that I can imagine that more bullpups will come on the scene mimicking the Kel-Tec, but at present, its the only one-- and it won't be in anyone's hands beforfe 2008 if I understand correctly. We still need to see what works and what bugs will need to be worked out of that one.


    All the best!

    John
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page